Palin claim on eBay plane sale doesn't fly

JUNEAU, Alaska - When Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin sought to illustrate her frugality and flair to delegates at the GOP convention Wednesday, she described how she disposed of a corporate jet acquired by her ...

If Palin said she "put it on eBay" and you say she implied it sold on eBay, please explain how this "doesn't fly". You made an inference; she didn't imply anything. Is this your big "gotcha"? Does anyone really question the left-wing bias in the media? This is a great example of it. By the way, I'd really like to hear more about what's in those Annenberg papers at UIC, or haven't you bothered with that?

This is one tale that Palin has told that basically checks out. Its an interesting tid-bit, but certainly no "gotcha". In Maryland, the Republican governor sold the state yatcht--one of the few things he did that won him bi-partisan support. Its hard to make the case for these things. The Democratic governor of Maryland for years used a bus--the original straight talk express.

The writers infer that saying she "put it on ebay" means she sold it on ebay. She didn't - but she DID sell it, and got more money for it than expected.

Later in the article, the writers note that the plan was also used to ferry prisoners. Only at the end of the article do they point out that the jet cost was double the current cost to ferry prisoners on US Marshall planes and commercial jets.

On the other hand, the headline of this article was just plain misleading. It implies something that isn't true - something they tried to accuse Palin of doing and failed.

What a lovely example of bias in the media - and here I thought they didn't like to parse their sentences.

This is the reason that Republicans are complaining about bias. Palin was correct that she put the jet on eBay. Doing so does not imply a sale, as most ebay sellers will confirm. it is (unfortunately) quite often that sellers' items fail on eBay then sell privately. What happened in this case is quite common. Gov. Palin ws telling the truth. this article should be retracted and/or corrected. Thanks.

I totally agree with that. But, here's the thing-Clinton was already President. Had he beenembroiled in that during a primary/election cycle (like Edwards) he never would have gottenelected-Gary Hart was busted.

Palin has burst on the scene in less than one week.Her speech was totally in her control-what she said,how she said it and what we needed to know abouther qualifications. She said she had enacted aprivate pipeline deal that we later learned has been floating around for 20 years and is nowhere nearfinalized or even a sure thing. She choose to talkabout that pipeline deal to demonstrate her progressive energy policy. She choose to use thejet sale on e-bay to explain her maverick style offiscal responsibility. Fine. Then tell us the straighttalk in plain speech so we are not mislead as anyonewould be...or use a better example of how cleveryou are. There must be others. But, don't leaveout the fact you switched schools more than usualbecause it raises more questions. Don't lean onpie-in-the-sky business ventures that may neverhappen as proof of your business saavy and don'tfeature a half-truth as a major punchline in the speechof your life. Fact check is fair game in the hiring process and voters are the employers who havea right to as much information and clarity as theycan get.

Palin is another Big Oil Company pawn! Her answer is lets drill all over Alaska.She worked for them for years and she still takes their money. Her husband (who they say is a fisherman) works full time for the oil industry.You guys like 4 dollars a gallon gas(or more) keep voting for people who put the interests of the oil industry above your interests.I wonder how much cash Cheney made during the Iraqi war from his Halliburton trust fund?Why do people keep electing those who put their interests above those of the USA?McCain is a guy who has been in Congress for 20 years yet he is some kind of Maverick?He has voted with Bush over 90% of the time Mc Same is not going to change a thing.I cannot vote for a guy who doesnt know how many houses he owns. The answer is seven John you have seven homes. So tell us again how you are just like us and youre a Maverick.

She said she put it on ebay, she didn't say she sold it on ebay - Nice writing - looking for implications instead of the actual words - You guys ever deal with lawyers?? No wonder this country is messed up- you guys don't bother with the facts anymore

Just out of curiosity - What changes has Obama brought to Illinois?My life has certainly got any better since he was elected to represent us.I don't ever recall hearing his name mentioned while he was in the state house either.

Fast Eddie, you need to be paying closer attention if you're going to base your vote on what your ears are telling you! She did NOT say to drill "ALL OVER" Alaska. They said her husband WAS a fisherman, but that NOW HE WORKS IN THE OIL FIELDS ON THE NORTH SLOPE OF ALASKA. No secret there! That's where he was when Sarah "got the call".

The "homes" question for John McCain was a pure set-up against him. For him to give an accurate, detailed answer would have taken a long time...that is the business his wife is in! Some are homes she owns for speculation, some are homes they have other family members living in, etc. It is a trap that is easy to pull on someone and hard to explain without boring people to death.

My wife and I own a retail business in our area. LEGALLY, however, we own the HOLDING COMPANY that owns the business. If we say we don't own the store, people would think we were lying. To go into the explanation of who owns what is "too much information" for most voters. McCain is likely not even aware of which investments she has in his name or which ones are just in her name. That was a question he would have had a dilly of a time answering without someone getting him in a trap.

That is NOTHING to base a vote for president on, that's for sure! If that is the kind of thing you use to make up your mind, maybe Thomas Jefferson was correct...we should have a literacy test for voters!

Palin's plane sale. Forget that, she has her own set of problems with all her babies. Thats where any mother would be with the kind of situation she faces at home. Now I hear she's going in training to be vice-president. That has to be unheard of in our country's history. According to that, anyone could go into training and be vice or even the president. What a joke on the American people.

Who are you kidding. Placing a jet on e-bay says just that. She made her point correctly and accurately and these liberal jerks over reached and 'implied it was sold'. I hope the Tribune has gotten rid of all the ethical editors that should have trashed this story and fired these two journalistic idiots.

"The last U.S. Marshal flights to and from Arizona transported 145 prisoners at a cost of $127,000, or about $875 per prisoner. That's cheaper than the jet, whose per-prisoner cost averaged $1,674."

Okay, that all sounds great. But I presume that the State of Alaska paid for the jet, whereas the federal government pays for the U.S. Marshal flights. Does the State of Alaska reimburse the federal government? If not, why am I paying to fly Alaska's prisoners to Arizona? And why the hell can't Alaska just build more prisons?

The "homes" question for John McCain was a pure set-up against him. For him to give an accurate, detailed answer would have taken a long time...that is the business his wife is in! Some are homes she owns for speculation, some are homes they have other family members living in, etc. It is a trap that is easy to pull on someone and hard to explain without boring people to death.My wife and I own a retail business in our area. LEGALLY, however, we own the HOLDING COMPANY that owns the business. If we say we don't own the store, people would think we were lying. To go into the explanation of who owns what is "too much information" for most voters. McCain is likely not even aware of which investments she has in his name or which ones are just in her name. That was a question he would have had a dilly of a time answering without someone getting him in a trap.

It seems a pretty simple matter to say, "We have x number of houses that we use for personal use and x number that other family members are living in. We also own a holding company which manages many other real estate transactions for investment purposes. I don't manage those personally."

I think you guys should be upset that your editorial was not placed in the opinion section of the paper. I will contact the paper to make sure the paper gets this right next time. The news section of the paper should be used for reporting news by journalists. You deserve an apology by the paper.

Palin never "claimed" that she sold plane on eBay. So the headline that says that her claim doesn't fly is maligning her.

Hey, anyone remember a young woman who was one heartbeat away from the British throne? She had a couple of kids and had a few more after her papa died. Seemed to be able to manage affairs of state & home just fine.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.